Get breaking news alerts via email

Click here to manage your alerts
Scientists leave GOP due to attitudes toward science
Politics » Do the Republicans drive away researchers tackling the world’s key scientific problems?
First Published Aug 28 2013 06:16 pm • Last Updated Feb 14 2014 11:33 pm

Scientists used to be well represented among the nearly half of Americans who voted Republican. But that’s changed over the years, and one poll found that just 6 percent of scientists call themselves part of the GOP now.

What happened? There might not be textbook answers, but there are theories.

Join the Discussion
Post a Comment

Barry Bickmore, a professor of geology at Brigham Young University and onetime Republican convention delegate in crimson-red Utah County in the nation’s reddest state, has pondered the issue at length. He contends his party is increasingly ruled by zealots and a demand for "ideological purity" that turns off scientists.

He says most examples are in the environmental sciences. And he points to the time in 2009 when majority-party Republicans in the Utah Capitol put climate-science doubters on a pedestal — while rejecting the mainstream scientist view about the danger global warming poses and even taking a beef about a Utah State University physicist to the university president.

"Scientists just don’t get those people," he says of Republicans who adhere to party orthodoxy about scientific questions on climate change, evolution and other hot-button issues. "They [in the GOP] are driving us away, people like me."

He points to the 6 percent statistic from a 2009 Pew poll, and wondered aloud if any other voting group offered lower GOP support.

(There was, it turns out. Just 3 percent of black women voters gave their support to GOP candidate Mitt Romney in the last election, and the percentage of all blacks voting for him was double that.)

Stacy Morris Bamberg, an expert in the biomechanics of walking at the University of Utah, suggests a number of reasons for the growing divide.

One might be that back when more scientists were part of the GOP, the party itself was more moderate. Now conservative Republicans and the tea party — with their focus on free-market capitalism and less federal government — have shifted the whole party to the right, and left scientists behind.

She wonders, too, if support is eroding along with federal funding for scientific research, especially basic research that might prove important long-term but offers few prospects for immediate money-making. While research grants shrink, the government dollars going to commercial research and development has swelled.

story continues below
story continues below

"It feels like an assault on science," says Bamberg, an independent who’s voted for several Democrats lately. "It feels like a personal assault almost."

And then, there is the antipathy toward scientists and their work that is increasingly part of the GOP dialogue.

Examples include the U.S. House majority leader’s "YouCut" campaign to target National Science Foundation grants and Sen. James Inhofe’s famous declaration that climate science is a hoax.

More recently, there was the House Science Committee’s subpoena of the raw — and legally protected — data used in air-pollution research. The fight involved two Utahns, Rep. Chris Stewart, chairman of the House Environment Subcommittee, and C. Arden Pope, a Brigham Young University economist whose groundbreaking work on the pollution-health link is the foundation for the nation’s health-based regulations.

There are lots of theories about the source of the mutual discomfort.

One theory goes that conservatives tend toward a single-minded, "authoritarian" world view, so they are less comfortable with the uncertainty that’s built into the practice of science.

Another hypothesis holds that the stauncher someone is about free-market economics, the more likely they are to see conspiracies in science, such as NASA faked the moon landing, there’s no proof cigarette smoking causes cancer and climate change is a hoax.

Jim Callison says he’s not sure what’s behind the change.

A Republican and water scientist who oversees Utah Valley University’s Environmental Management Program, he suggested the rift is overblown. In his personal dealings with politicians, he said, he hasn’t perceived tension.

Next Page >

Copyright 2014 The Salt Lake Tribune. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Top Reader Comments Read All Comments Post a Comment
Click here to read all comments   Click here to post a comment

About Reader Comments

Reader comments on sltrib.com are the opinions of the writer, not The Salt Lake Tribune. We will delete comments containing obscenities, personal attacks and inappropriate or offensive remarks. Flagrant or repeat violators will be banned. If you see an objectionable comment, please alert us by clicking the arrow on the upper right side of the comment and selecting "Flag comment as inappropriate". If you've recently registered with Disqus or aren't seeing your comments immediately, you may need to verify your email address. To do so, visit disqus.com/account.
See more about comments here.
Staying Connected
Contests and Promotions
  • Search Obituaries
  • Place an Obituary

  • Search Cars
  • Search Homes
  • Search Jobs
  • Search Marketplace
  • Search Legal Notices

  • Other Services
  • Advertise With Us
  • Subscribe to the Newspaper
  • Access your e-Edition
  • Frequently Asked Questions
  • Contact a newsroom staff member
  • Access the Trib Archives
  • Privacy Policy
  • Missing your paper? Need to place your paper on vacation hold? For this and any other subscription related needs, click here or call 801.204.6100.